Talk:2003 Halloween solar storms

open access paper

https://doaj.org/article/7bdb17fe544949fd800462d196f73de2

©Geni (talk) 16:56, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Halloween solar storms, 2003. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110728172705/http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/Services/HalloweenStorms_assessment.pdf to http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/Services/HalloweenStorms_assessment.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:07, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 24 November 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved to 2003 Halloween solar storms, per Wikipedia policy. The discussion is moot now, so closing. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 01:54, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

---

Halloween solar storms, 2003 → Halloween solar storms – Unnecessary disambiguation, possibly, but definitely matches an outdated naming convention for elections; suggest Solar storm of 2003 as an alternative. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 07:43, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (events) the order is when, where, what, which would mean 2003 solar storms. Gonnym (talk) 11:12, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

• Solar storm of 2003 or Solar storms of 2003: Putting the year at the end is better; see the convention for Wikipedia:Naming conventions (events)#Tornados and tornado outbreaks. It is much easier to remember that you're looking for information about a solar storm and type that into the search box and pick the correct year than to remember that you're looking for something that happened in 2003 and type that into the search box and pick the solar storm (and the search box behavior picks articles in preference to redirects.) —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 16:43, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
• Support moving to 2003 Halloween solar storms or 2003 solar storms, per WP:CONCISE and the standard naming convention for these types of articles. The current title is just unwieldy, while the titles I proposed would do the best job of accurately conveying the subject, being as concise as possible, and also matching our current naming conventions. "Halloween solar storms" is just too general overall, because there could've been other notable solar storms around Halloween, and this event likely isn't the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for Halloween solar storms in general. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 23:39, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
• Comment I speedily moved Halloween solar storms, 2003 to 2003 Halloween solar storms per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (events). I'm leaving the RM open since the nominator proposes a different title. Destroyeraa (Alternate account) 22:50, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

• No, you should've closed the discussion as well. Moving the article basically rendered this entire discussion moot. Doesn't matter if it's the same title as the one originally proposed. You need to either move the page and do a procedural close, or vote but leave the page alone. Please keep that in mind in the future. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 01:54, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.